Prospective surveillance of breast cancer-related lymphoedema in the first-year post-surgery: feasibility and comparison of screening measures.

PURPOSE: To examine the feasibility of a breast cancer-related lymphoedema (BCRL) screening programme. Additionally, to investigate the efficacy of bioimpedance analysis (BIA) compared to circumferential measurements (CM) in detecting BCRL. METHODS: This was a 12-month prospective feasibility study. Participants were recruited from two diagnostic breast clinics and consented to be screened for BCRL. Pre-surgical assessments were conducted, and participants were followed up at quarterly intervals. BIA and CM measurements were conducted at all time points. An L-Dex score of >10 or a 10-U increase from baseline or a ≥5 % increase in proximal, distal or total percentage volume difference (PVD) from baseline was indicative of BCRL. Information was collected on subjective symptoms, potential risk factors, demographics and medical data. Feasibility was based on uptake and retention. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-six participants were recruited with an attrition rate of 16.2 %. Participants' mean age was 59 years with the majority having stage I (63.9 %), infiltrating ductal carcinoma (87.4 %). 31.6 % were identified as having BCRL, 90.3 % detected by CM and 35.5 % by BIA (p = ≤0.0001). We found no significant correlation between BIA and CM. Participants identified as having BCRL had a higher BMI, a recent injury to their 'at-risk' arm and more lymph nodes excised (p = <0.05). These findings were not evident across all time points. A large percentage of participants had transient BCRL when assessed by a lymphoedema physiotherapist. CONCLUSIONS: BCRL screening is acceptable and valued by breast cancer survivors. Work needs to continue to establish the most effective screening tool and the natural behaviour of BCRL within the first-year post-surgery.

A focus group study exploring gynecological cancer survivors' experiences and perceptions of participating in a RCT testing the efficacy of a home-based physical activity intervention.

PURPOSE: This study aims to explore gynecological cancer survivors' perceptions and experiences following participation in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing the efficacy of a home-based physical activity behavioral change intervention (Donnelly et al., Gynecol Oncol 122:618-624, 2011). METHODS: All participants completing a two-armed parallel RCT were invited to participate in the study (31/33) (Donnelly et al., Gynecol Oncol 122:618-624, 2011). Sixteen participants took part (16/31; physical activity (PA) group n = 9, contact control (CC) group n = 7). Four qualitative group interviews were conducted (focus group size 3-5). A structured interview guide was followed by an independent moderator. Groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the framework approach (Ritchie and Spencer 2001), a five-stage qualitative method of analysis. RESULTS: One of the most unanimously perceived benefits of taking part in the programme regarded participants' psychological well-being. Additional benefits included improved physical fitness and functioning. Important programme features included the weekly telephone calls from a physiotherapist, the patient-professional relationship, and goal setting. Participants' own motivation and programme timing were also identified as important factors. Suggestions for improvements include: opportunities for social interaction with other gynecological cancer survivors and greater exercise choice. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that women diagnosed with gynecological cancer perceive participation in physical activity as important and participation provides benefits in terms of psychological well-being and improved physical functioning. Support for continuation of many of the current features of the home-based programme was provided. Findings provide insight and rationale for the selection of components for future home-based physical activity interventions. Findings also support further research into the development of multidimensional interventions for the gynecological cancer population.

A randomised controlled trial testing the feasibility and efficacy of a physical activity behavioural change intervention in managing fatigue with gynaecological cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and efficacy of a physical activity behavioural change intervention in managing cancer-related fatigue among gynaecological cancer survivors during and post anti-cancer treatments. METHODS: A two arm, single blind, randomised controlled trial was conducted within the Northern Ireland regional Cancer Centre. Thirty three sedentary gynaecological cancer survivors (stage I-III; ≤3 years post diagnosis), experiencing cancer-related fatigue (mild-severe) took part. Participants were randomly assigned to a behavioural change, moderate intensity physical activity intervention (n=16) or a Contact Control group (n=17). The primary outcome was fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form and Functional Assessment in Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue subscale). Secondary outcomes included quality of life, physical functioning, positive and negative affect, depression, body composition, sleep dysfunction and self-reported physical activity. Feasibility was assessed based on the recruitment rate, programme and physical activity adherence and participants' programme evaluation, including optional focus groups (n=16). RESULTS: Twenty five percent of eligible women took part (33/134). Participants were 8.7 (SD=9.1) months post diagnosis, with a mean age of 53 (SD=10.3) years. The majority of the sample had a diagnosis of ovarian (n=12) or endometrial cancer (n=11). Significant differences favouring the intervention group were observed for fatigue at 12 weeks and 6 months follow-up (12 week: mean difference=-11.06; 95% confidence interval (CI)=-21.89 to -0.23; effect size (d)=0.13; p=0.046; 6 month: mean difference=-19.48; 95% CI=-19.67 to -19.15; effect size (d)=0.20; p=0.01). A mean of 10 calls (SD=1.2 calls) were delivered to the Physical Activity Group, and 10 (SD=1.6 calls) to the CC group. The intervention was positively perceived based on exit questionnaire and focus group findings. CONCLUSIONS: A physical activity behavioural change intervention for gynaecological cancer survivors is feasible in terms of participants' programme adherence and evaluation, and the intervention demonstrates improvements in fatigue. However, confirmation in the form of a larger fully powered RCT is warranted.